1. Field of the Invention
This invention relates to Aeronautics and more particularly to big high-capacity airports, for heavier-than-air-aircraft, which extend in size over areas much bigger than the "Landing Field" patent classification suggests; and, specifically to the arrangements of their multiple hard surfaced aircraft support members which adapt to sites much more economically than do "Landing Fields" or so called "airfields" because hills between one way airport runways need drainage grading only.
"Landing field" pertains more to the apron member of this invention than to its runway members because this invention's apron is a big level area while the runways may extend along ridges or over narrow portions of several fields far beyond the apron. The apron does not include runways but often provides taxi passageways to aviation service or facilities distributed thereon and provides direct, non-circular taxiing hard surface support between the approach and the departure runways.
Thus, this apron is integrated by uniting the usual ramp or tarmac with the aviation buildings, such as terminal area buildings, usually grouped at the side or center of the ramp in the prior art.
2. Description of the Related Art
Most all big airports are based on the old airfield concept of bunching together the runways as they expand capacity. This has resulted in parallel runways too close together for safe simultaneous approaches and departures in low visibility weather conditions; and, in use of one long parallel taxiway co-located with each runway and including several short high speed and low speed taxiways interconnecting this long taxiway to the runway so that the runways can be used in two directions.
This antiquated method of adding more runways and many taxiways results in excessive taxi distances, slowed speeds because of numerous stops and goes at the many intersections of runways with other runways, more such delays between taxiways and runways and still more between taxiways and taxiways. The more the taxiways, the more the delays and their inefficiency and the cost of taxiing, the more the radio calls. These add up for increased taxi accidents. During periods of low visibility, the flight operational capacity decreases and often stops. The delays, the workload, the confusion may extend to the enroute air-traffic control throughout a passenger hub area including several other airports and the crossing airways traffic therebetween.
Applicant has determined only a few airports, out of the over 9,000 airports in the U.S.A., are big airports. Of these big airports studied, applicant submits the most efficient one is Dallas - Ft. Worth (DFW) by studying its structural configuration.
DFW is the most recently built airport. Its structure, however, does not provide for future expansion with efficiency of operations when compared to applicant's invention. Comparisons follow:
DFW has 31.5 statute miles of taxiways and a big long apron with little use of each of its three center areas. There are no aircraft taxi passageways across the apron; thus, requiring at least 2.5 miles taxi distance from one side to the opposite side. Applicant's invention's apron taxi distance is 1.5 miles. Both aprons have about the same size areas occupied by the usual commercial and service facilities. DFW average taxi distance from the closest ends of the closest runways to average apron passenger gate is 1.1 mile compared to 0.82 mile for this invention's.
DFW average taxi distance from the farthest ends of farthest runways to average apron gate is 3.2 miles compared to 0.82 mile for this invention's. The differential results from DFW use of the parallel co-located runway-taxiway concept for two way use of each runway while this invention's one way structural configuration does not result in taxi use of distant ends of any runways. Only flight operations use applicant's distant ends. Infrequent heavy maintenance taxi use of distant ends is provided by this invention's embodiments when desirable as will be seen. The taxi distance and its cost will increase for DFW if it increases the number of its runways because they must be located farther out. Applicant's invention used twelve runways for this study while DFW uses six.
Other inefficient and costly structural characteristics of DFW compared to applicant's invention follow: DFW's over 400 intersections of taxiways with taxiways and taxiways with runways to this invention's two embodiments being zero intersections.
DFW does show two outer runways oriented much like applicant's in that they have center lines converging with others and one end of each is connected to the apron by use of taxiways disposed between the runways and apron. But one of these two runways has its closer end, to the apron, extending beyond the apron. This requires additional taxi distance, and both runways utilize the two way structures of one long high speed taxiway co-located and parallel with each runway and with interconnecting taxiways therebetween. Applicant's invention does not resort to such expensive to build, expensive to taxi upon and potentially two way dangerous structure.
Partial modification of DFW to one way structure and operations by closing 202 of its aircraft intrusive intersections of runways with taxiways and taxiways with other taxiways, and 10.5 miles of taxiways closed would decrease its taxiing distance by 1/3, taxi time by 1/2 and would greatly increase its safety and capacity.
A new airfield type airport requiring grading and leveling the majority of some 42 square miles of earth is under construction at Denver, Colo. This newly designed airport, twice the size of DFW, has been studied for ten years and published in the media and in official documents. Thus, applicant believes it is prior art.
Although the Denver Airport will be at least twice the size of DFW, its capacity is held by its planners as being restricted and applicant's study of this prior art shows it to be a massive assemblage of runways and taxiways of such great size that its capacity, with twice the runways of DFW, will be less than twice that of DFW. The Denver Airport will have only half the capacity of applicant's invention in periods of low visibility despite both airports having same number and size of runways. The main difference, as will be seen, is that applicant's invention doesn't use Denver's excessive and costly taxiways distances.
This prior art New Denver Airport (DEN) has a network of 90 miles of taxiways comprising more than 60 right angle turns that will slow and at times stop taxiing aircraft. It will have 525 intersections involving its taxiways with other taxiways and taxiways intersecting with its 12 runways. Of these, 108 are high speed crossings.
Based on the FAA standard for new big airports in year 2020 to handle one million landing aircraft, this complex, costly New Denver Airfield will have 46 million taxi safety risks per year involving those 525 aircraft intrusive intersections while this invention's 12 clear runways will have zero such safety risks.
This invention can land at least 4 simultaneous streams of aircraft in zero visibility while still converging from airways. Their lateral separations at landing will be at least 1.25 miles. Denver will converge only 66% of its maximum of 3 streams capacity in zero visibility and converge them to a terrifying 4,300 feet separation while still in flight and in final turns to final approach to parallel flight separation of only 4300 feet which will result in 495,000 inflight safety risks per year compared to the oneway airport in FIG. 1 having no such flight safety risks. The FAA standard will not be attained without converging runways. Parallel runways won't work.
Further problems of the prior art solved by applicant's invention, when compared with the New Denver Airport are: complicated procedural and operational requirements brought on by excessive structural members. This excess results in less operating efficiencies; 3.2 average taxi distance for DEN to 0.8 mile for this invention at FIG. 1 for a taxiing savings of $495 thousand per day based on an FAA estimate of one million aircraft each year; and, DEN will not easily adapt to the industry requirement for automated control of aircraft flight and taxi operations, while applicant's invention's simple structure will easily adapt and increase its capacity when equipped for automation. Applicant's structure's cost of construction savings is estimated, in 1987 dollars, when compared to DEN is: for the 68 extra miles of high speed taxiways, 17 miles extra low speed taxiways, leveling and preparing into one giant plane the extra 31 square miles area required by DEN in the selected site of rough terrain to meet its old "airfield" structural concept will save $1.82 billion from the over $3 billion Denver planning estimated cost of their New Denver Airport.
Converging runways are shown in prior art "tangent runways" flight article, Oct. 21, 1943, page 454, which discloses multiple converging runways intermixed with taxiways around a circular loading ramp surrounding the aviation service facility buildings. The runways intersect with other runways while applicant's invention has runways clear of other runways; and, applicant's taxi passageways directly through the middle of apron and through the distribution of facility buildings for significantly shorter passageway hard support surface structure between the approach runways and the departure runways when both airports are the same size.
Prior art BROWN, U.S. Pat. No. 3,572,619, Mar. 30, 1971, discloses a ramp surrounding facility buildings "terminal area" identical to the Blight article. Brown's runways are clear of other runway intersections but the approach and departure runways have common center lines, and Brown's runways and taxiways are off-set to one side of his ramp resulting in three times as much taxi distance structure as does applicant's taxi structure measured from the approach runway on a direct line through the facility building distribution to the departure runway. Brown's circular ramp and off-set taxiways and runways result in circular long taxi distances from one direction into the opposite direction while applicant's taxi distances are on short, direct, linear, noncircular distance structure.